Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 66 (9164 total)
6 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,469 Year: 3,726/9,624 Month: 597/974 Week: 210/276 Day: 50/34 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Noah's Ark volume calculation
Larni
Member
Posts: 4000
From: Liverpool
Joined: 09-16-2005


Message 19 of 347 (490077)
12-02-2008 6:19 AM
Reply to: Message 16 by Peg
12-02-2008 5:04 AM


Re: How many 'species' on the ark?
For example, oceanographic studies indicate that the Mid-Atlantic Ridge may have crossed that ocean above the surface.
Please provide some evidence of this claim (remember this has hold true for the Noaichian time frame as I'm sure you are not talking about Pangaea).

This message is a reply to:
 Message 16 by Peg, posted 12-02-2008 5:04 AM Peg has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 38 by Peg, posted 12-03-2008 3:50 AM Larni has replied

Larni
Member
Posts: 4000
From: Liverpool
Joined: 09-16-2005


Message 51 of 347 (490232)
12-03-2008 7:10 AM
Reply to: Message 38 by Peg
12-03-2008 3:50 AM


Re: How many 'species' on the ark?
"Two hundred million years ago the Atlantic Ocean was just a small bay between the continents of Africa, Europe, and the Americas. Now it is a huge ocean. The mid-Atlantic Ridge spreading centre that runs north-south beneath the Atlantic Ocean has been adding about 24km of new crust every million years, with the result that the Atlantic Ocean is now almost 5000km wide."
Dude, this is common knowledge. TWO HUNDRED MILLION YEARS AGO!
You do know that this is the Mesozoic era (Jurassic period), don't you?
Noah was not around then.
Humans were not around then.
Mammals around at that time included Morganucodon but not in any way human, primate or even placental mammals.
How is this evidence that there was a flood? What do you think you link shows?
also, it was only a few thousand years ago that the Papua New Guinea people immigrated to the norhtern tip of australia...and they walked here! So we have recent evidence of a much higher sea floor then it is today
A quick search indicate that humans arrived on P.N.G. about 60k years ago (so no Noachian time frame) during an ice age when the sea level was lower (so no flood, then).
Your point remains unsupported and in fact refuted by the available evidence.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 38 by Peg, posted 12-03-2008 3:50 AM Peg has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 88 by Peg, posted 12-04-2008 5:29 AM Larni has replied

Larni
Member
Posts: 4000
From: Liverpool
Joined: 09-16-2005


Message 59 of 347 (490273)
12-03-2008 1:08 PM
Reply to: Message 47 by Peg
12-03-2008 4:59 AM


Re: How many 'species' on the ark?
lower sea levels enabled the Papua new guinea people to walk to australia....just as some ocean researches suggest that ridges aided animal migration.
Untrue. They used boats. Unless you have evidence to the contrary?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 47 by Peg, posted 12-03-2008 4:59 AM Peg has not replied

Larni
Member
Posts: 4000
From: Liverpool
Joined: 09-16-2005


Message 95 of 347 (490398)
12-04-2008 7:39 AM
Reply to: Message 88 by Peg
12-04-2008 5:29 AM


Re: How many 'species' on the ark?
but perhaps back in noahs day, with a much lower sea level and much more land and continents closer together, animals were free to roam anywhere on the earth
But this was not the case in Noahician times. 5000 years ago the continents were in exactly the same place as they are now. A large land mass like Panaea has not been the case for hundreds of millions of years.
Not within the biblical time frame.
Why is this not apparent to you? Why do you beleive that the continents 5000 years ago where any different to what they are now?
if the story of Noah is true, then obviously all the animals he collected could be found inhis geographic location
You say 'if'! Your unsumountable problem is that there is no evidence to suggest that the Noachain story is true.
Remember: this is a science forum; you need to back up what you say with evidence. You cannot say 'if' and then continue the sentance as if it is a priori true. This is a logical fallacy.
that happened in the last 4-5 thousand years
so it in itself proves that sea levels must have been lower then they once were.
What you are doing is asserting your position without providing evidence. You are saying (without any evidence at all) that you are right. I'm not saying here that you are wrong: I'm asking you to provide evidence to suggest you are right.
Do please, provide evidence of humans walking from P.N.G. to Oz 4-5 thousand years ago.
You have fallen into the habit of many creationists attempting to debate in a science forum: you assert with 'ifs' and 'perhaps' and fail to provide evidence for your claim.
I can just as easily assert that Enki created humans by mixing his sperm with dirt to create humans. After all, if he did create us he must have had the ability to do so, and because he was around before the xian god he must have done it first, right?
This is exactly what you are doing.
Edited by Larni, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 88 by Peg, posted 12-04-2008 5:29 AM Peg has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 109 by Peg, posted 12-05-2008 3:03 AM Larni has replied

Larni
Member
Posts: 4000
From: Liverpool
Joined: 09-16-2005


Message 110 of 347 (490495)
12-05-2008 6:01 AM
Reply to: Message 109 by Peg
12-05-2008 3:03 AM


Re: How many 'species' on the ark?
orthodox science teaches that the surface of the earth has been shaped in many places by powerful glaciers during a series of ice ages. But apparent evidence of glacial activity can sometimes be the result of water action.
Please show me.
Is it possible that some of the evidence for the Flood is being misread as evidence of an ice age?
You have to show that all the evidence can be accounted for by a flood. Otherwise we cannot conclude a world wide flood. And the time frames have to be right.
YOU HAVE YET TO ADDRESS THE ISSUE OF TIME FRAME IN ANY POST TO ME.
the fossil record is another evidence... the sudden extinction of mammals ... all around the world, species of mammals became extinct.
Again with the time frame. Define sudden, please. Is it 1 year; or millions of years?
Tens of thousands of mammoths were killed and quick-frozen in Siberia. This could very well be evidence of a flood that evolutionists dont believe ever happened
How is this evidence of a flood?
All you seem to say is if, if, if. You never ezamine the issue of time frames.
Please address these issues.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 109 by Peg, posted 12-05-2008 3:03 AM Peg has not replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024